Archive for the ‘Strategy’ Category

“What if” Oil and Water Do Not Mix – Lessons from BP

Monday, September 6th, 2010

By Denise Harrison, Vice President

Strategic Planning Expert

Strategic planning and risk assessment – yes, you must look at what would happen if…If you fail to assess and mitigate risk during strategic planning you could end up with a BP-like disaster.  While the exact causes of the Macondo rig disaster are not yet known, it is nonetheless fair to ask: “Was this a Threat or did BP shoot themselves in the foot?” Well, probably both actually. 

THREATS

Threats are events that occur due to external forces outside of your control and which significantly impact your business.  Examples include recessions, hurricanes, the death of a key employee, and/or competitors merging (to name a few).  In BP’s case, the drilling team seemingly did not adequately prepare for the oil reservoir pressure exceeding the well’s engineered capacity, and the resulting blow-out. What should they have done to mitigate the risk? Here are five suggestions: your strategic planning should examine each and select the best mix. 

Prevent

BP first and foremost should have considered how they could prevent a blowout from happening:  this well was an exceptionally deep well, so engineering standards should have been set high.  Cutting costs or speeding up the timeframe for the well to come on line should have been weighed against the high-risk nature of a deep-water well.  High risk?  The depth of the well makes adjustments difficult because everything needs to be adjusted by remotely-controlled tools and vehicles in conditions where the significant water pressure adds complexity to any operation. 

Reduce Exposure

Plans should have been in place for a well blowout, as well as plans for evacuation and spill containment.  Evaluation:  all but eleven people were able to evacuate the drilling rig.  But the disaster far exceeded what happened on the rig platform.  The disaster on the surface was the first hint of the catastrophe that was happening beneath the surface.  As has become apparent, BP did not have adequate plans in place to mitigate the massive amounts of oil that began spewing from the well.  

Early Warning

Yes, there apparently were early warning signs – and these should have been signals to slow down the well completion process; not pour the mud and the cement until the pressure was understood, slowing down so that adjustments could be made that would insure the integrity of the well.  If early warning signs had been heeded and appropriate procedures been in place, the drilling team might have taken the time to truly assess what was really happening a mile beneath the water’s surface. 

Contingency

There are also questions with regard to the ill-fated blowout preventer: were all the checks done completely; were some shortcuts taken; were any and all changes to the design fully tested before the blow-out preventer was installed?  Was the effectiveness of redundancy exploited fully? 

Hedge

Typically, we look at ways to hedge when mitigating risk, but there are not necessarily ways to hedge every threat.  In this case, drilling could have been stopped and other wells could have provided oil.  Also, relief wells could have been drilled when the integrity of the well was suspect. 

Had BP really examined their threats, they would have had better plans in place and might have prevented the disaster which will render the well useless and cost BP billions of dollars in funds for clean up.  It is important when developing threats that people understand what the implications of the threat could really look like – so scenario planning might be in order.    For instance, a threat could be a hurricane, but you might have different scenarios for a category 1 hurricane, a category 3 hurricane, and a category 5 hurricane.  I was working with one team which identified hurricanes as a threat and the team came up with mitigating strategies for category 1 and 3 hurricanes – however, they decided that mitigating the risk of a category 5 was not possible, so a contingency plan was developed:  Evacuate and take care of the people; lock down the production facility as suggested in the plans for a 1 and 3, but understand that the people’s safety came first.  In addition, they developed a clean-up plan for after the devastation of a category 5 hurricane.                        

NOW, SHOOTING YOURSELF IN THE FOOT

Shooting Yourself in the Foot involves a self-inflicted blunder. Apparently BP did not have robust plans to mitigate the risk of the well blowout Threat.   Besides having a poor risk mitigation strategy, they also shot themselves in the foot by having only a short-term mindset which prevented them from properly investing (both time and money) in this high-risk, deep water well.  This short-term focus caused them to spend less, increasing the risk and increasing the downside consequences of the higher risk. Not only will the well be shutdown for good and the upfront investment costs of designing and drilling the well lost, but the resulting environmental disaster will also require significant spending to clean up the mess they made.  Additionally, their reputation will be tarnished forever.  Short-term thinking did not only lower this well’s future returns; it obliterated all future returns from this well, as well as cutting into BP’s future earnings and market value. 

Lessons Learned

It is important during strategic planning to think about growth and about profitable growth, but don’t put blinders on and simply chase growth and profit. Taking the time and spending the money to mitigate risk and protecting yourself from downside exposure will save you money in the long-run.  It may well spell the difference between profitable growth and unmitigated disaster.  As you develop your strategic planning, spend time on risk assessment and mitigation of Threats posed by external forces.  In addition, be sure that you take some time and identify ways that you could Shoot Yourself in the Foot, and discuss options which you might pursue to avoid losing your toes.

Denise Harrison is Vice President of the Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc.  She can be reached at harrison@cssp.com

Strategy Analysis: Expand

Monday, August 16th, 2010

by M. Dana Baldwin, Senior Consultant

Strategic Planning Expert

In strategic planning, there are five basic strategies one may pursue: Expand, Maintain, Contract, Milk or Withdraw.  The most aggressive strategy is Expand.  What does an Expand strategy encompass?

First, let’s define the Expand strategy so we have a basis on which to base discussion.  The dictionary defines expand as: to increase the extent, number, volume, or scope of, to enlarge. We further define an expand strategy as one in which we are growing significantly faster than the market or market segment is growing overall.

To follow an expand strategy, a company must decide to provide the resources which will support the targeted growth rate.  It implies that the company’s growth will absorb much of the real growth of the markets in which the company is competing.  It also implies that the company is willing to take on competitors in order to take market share from them, in addition to absorbing the growth in the market place itself.

Before we select the expand strategy, we need to look in depth at each market segment to see whether it will qualify for an expand strategy.  What are the requirements that a market segment should have in order to be eligible for an expand strategy?

First, we need to be able to have sufficient resources, both people and money, to properly support the strategy to expand our sales volume in each affected market segment.  An expansion strategy can be quite expensive, and will likely absorb a lot of time of some key people in your company.

Second, it should be in a relatively attractive market.  We use a 3 x 3 matrix to demonstrate how attractive a market segment is, and also how strong a competitor we are relative to our own competition.

When you look at the matrix above, you can readily see that the market attractiveness for the suggested strategy of expand is high.  Notice too, that the competitive strength (vertical axis) may range from being a weak competitor/new entry to being a strong, dominant competitor.  Our goal over time is to move our competitive position up the axis to the strongest possible competitive position.

Often it won’t make a lot of sense to expand in a less attractive market segment.  The one exception for this is in a moderately attractive market in which you are the dominant player.  If the potential for a good long term reward is present in a moderately attractive segment where you are a strong number one, then expand should certainly be considered.

Many companies simply do not have the depth of resources – usually people resources – to support too many expand strategies.  Companies need to select the few markets where they want to expend the resources to significantly gain market share.  Focusing resources is paramount to any plan’s success – so your team should not try to expand in all markets.  Rather, we suggest pick the 2-3 that, given the effort, will deliver the most bang for your buck.  We find that if you force the team to pick only 2-3 expand strategies immediately, a few “winners” will be chosen.  This selection of only a few “expands” helps ensure that a team will be successful on the chosen markets.

In conclusion, an expand strategy is a strong bet on your company’s ability to grab market share at a rate higher than the market is expanding, with the goal of increasing your return on investment over time.  This means you will aim to increase your top line sales and bottom line profits at a rate higher than the additional costs you will be incurring in your expansion efforts.

For detailed directions for using the expand strategy in your Simplified Strategic Planning process go to Simplified Strategic Planning book.

M. Dana Baldwin is a Senior Consultant with Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc. and can be reached at baldwin@cssp.com.

© Copyright 2010 by Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI — Reprint permission granted with full attribution.

Finding Resistance

Tuesday, July 20th, 2010

By Robert W. Bradford, President/CEO

Strategic Planning Expert Robert Bradford

In strategy, you will inevitably find resistance to your plans.  This resistance is sometimes forceful, and other times something you can overcome with resources and effort.  An interesting question is how to deal with resistance.  Should you always push hard to overcome resistance to your strategic objectives (probably not) – or should you allow resistance to stop you every time the going gets hard (also probably not)? 

There are several key questions to ask yourself about the resistance you encounter to your strategic objectives.  First, what is the nature of the resistance?  Are you finding the objective difficult because of competition, the learning required, or the resources required?  Second, is the resistance something that is even possible to overcome?  Third – and very importantly – how important is the objective to your strategic success?  

Very often, the thing that separates great companies from OK companies is the willingness to do difficult things.  A great company will often (but not always) undertake to overcome obstacles that stand between it and true strategic differentiation.  OK companies allow themselves to be stopped by adversity. 

This does not mean that you must always persevere to be great.  Another hallmark of great companies is the ability to give up where it is appropriate.  Not too soon – but also not delayed where the end result will be a large consumption of resources with little or no forward strategic motion. 

What kind of organization is yours?  Do you show perseverance or are you stoppable?  And when you persevere, how do you assure that you are not spinning your wheels, attempting to overcome difficult resistance that will lead to little gain? 

Robert Bradford is President/CEO of the Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc.  He can be reached at rbradford@cssp.com.

Everyone Knows Execution is Important – So Why Do We Fail to Execute?

Monday, June 14th, 2010

Strategic Planning Expert

By Denise Harrison, Vice President

Execution of strategy: we know it is important, but why doesn’t it happen? Based on my experience working with over 100 companies on strategy development there are four key areas that lead to execution success.

  1. Focus on the few:
    1. Select a few – 8-10 key strategic objectives to accomplish in the next 12 – 18 months. No more than 10! Don’t fall into the trap of “We have to do this!” and end up with 12 to 15. It is better to work on a few rather than work on everything and get nothing completed. Four to six is even better, especially if the objectives are large.
    2. Once you have selected the key objectives, then develop action plans that are detailed roadmaps of how you will accomplish these objectives:
      1. What are the action steps (granular detail)?
      2. Who is involved with/responsible for each step?
      3. How much time will each step take?
      4. How much money will each step cost?
  2. Balance your resources:
    1. Now you know the amount of time and money for each objective, do you have enough resources? Do you have the right resources?
      1. Often the required financial resources are clarified in the budgeting process
      2. The human resource aspect is often lightly considered (if at all) and this is where many implementation plans go off-track.
        1. Understand that your people have day-to-day activities that help the business run in addition to the projects that will position the company for future growth; you have to balance these requirements so that both are accomplished.
        2. If you find that you do not have the resources to accomplish your action plans, evaluate how you can
          1. Delegate (both routine as well as project activities)
          2. Eliminate (routine and/or project)
          3. Reduce (routine and/or project)
          4. Postpone (project only – you can’t postpone routine activities; they just don’t happen)
        3. The operative word here is balance!
  3. Monitor your progress:
    1. Monthly have your action plan team leaders report on their progress to the strategic planning team
      1. Work with the team to relieve bottlenecks if projects are behind
      2. The strategic planning team should be able to help reduce bottlenecks – use this meeting as a solution-finding meeting rather than a way to assess blame. The team should be working together to move things forward.
    2. If new projects come up, then evaluate each project in the context of what has already been selected.
      1. If the new project is more important than one of the current key objectives, then add it, but be sure to take one away.
      2. Do not pile objectives on top of one another – sometimes we assume that we have hatched new resources during the year.
      3. Do not evaluate new projects in isolation – evaluate them in the context of the projects that are already on your plate. If the current projects need to stay on the list, save the new one for next year’s strategic planning.
  4. Communicate early and often
    1. Communicate the strategy and key objectives to all employees
      1. Make sure that communication is clear and concise
      2. Make sure the communication is two-way (see article: Lessons Learned in Aligning an Organization -Two Way Communication is Key)
        1. Give employees a way to react
        2. Have them prepare what their departments are going to do in support of the strategy and key objects – make sure the communication is two-way.
    2. Communicate frequently and update when changes occur.
    3. If everyone in the boat has his/her oar in the water and everyone is rowing in the same direction as the company, it will move forward quickly – outpacing the competition.

Efficient strategic execution is paramount to outperforming your competition during this recovery phase of the economy.  If you accomplish these four steps you should achieve over 90% of your objectives within the timeframe selected.

Denise Harrison is Vice President of the Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc.  She can be reached at harrison@cssp.com

Next Steps: Will we be ready to take advantage of the improving economy as it arrives?

Wednesday, June 2nd, 2010
Strategic Planning Expert

Strategic Planning Expert

by M. Dana Baldwin, Senior Consultant

In my prior article (“Time to Start Planning for Growth – Step One: Analysis“), we discussed the lessons we should be learning from the major slowdown in business experienced during the recession, and how to analyze them so we would be positioned to plan to grow as business improves.

As indicated in the previous article, we tried to learn what our markets would be looking for as their business improves.  We studied the competition to learn how they were reacting to the slowdown in business during the recession.  We probed for weaknesses and looked to see where our competitors pulled back and possibly even lowered service levels.  We tried to anticipate what the market would be asking for as business improved in order to be positioned to better serve the market in the future. 

Now that it appears that the recession is ebbing, and growth is returning to the economy, what steps should our company be taking to establish strategies that will lead to improving our sales and our profits? 

First, we need to revisit our strategic planning.  In order to take the best advantage of our earlier work, we must review our market segments to obtain the best information on which we will base our strategies.  Especially important is the updating of our assumptions.  The efficacy of our work on assumptions will guide our future course and direction, so the importance of doing this well and thoroughly cannot be overemphasized.  Good work here will mean we likely will have appropriate strategies for our core market segments. 

Another key part of strategic planning is our focus on new opportunities.  Part of our work to establish our future course and direction will be started with our brainstorming of perceived opportunities.  At least some of these perceived opportunities should come from the analysis we did in our pre-planning efforts (discussed in the prior article).  These efforts should have resulted in our looking for what our customers and prospective customers will be seeking as they recover, and should be targeted at responding to their anticipated needs and preferences. 

Once we have established the products and services which our markets – both current customers and future prospects – will be seeking, we need to determine what our responses will be.  We need to assess each opportunity to determine how each one will address the future needs and preferences of our prospects, and how each one will fit into our future.  How does each relate to our capabilities and our strategic competency?  Is each opportunity a good fit with our course and direction?  Selecting those which fit our future direction and which utilize our strengths and competencies, and which meet the anticipated needs of our customers and prospects is a key to our future success. 

Next step is the actual execution of our strategies and our action plans.  Action plans are simply the step by step roadmap which will be used to accomplish our objectives.  A detailed action plan with responsibilities assigned and dates agreed upon is the key tool in accomplishing the objective.  Monthly update meetings are used to keep our action plans on time.  In the monthly update sessions, the action plan leaders report on progress, confirm schedules for the upcoming month and make any updates or changes needed to make the action plan effective.  Pulling all this together and getting our strategies and action plans executed effectively are keys to our profitability in the future. 

If you’ve been dragging your feet about doing SP because of the cost or uncertainty, ”bite the bullet, and get going”.  It’s ultimately about execution, but intelligent formulation of strategic direction is necessary first. And the time is now! 

M. Dana Baldwin is a Senior Consultant with Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc. and can be reached at baldwin@cssp.com.

© Copyright 2010 by Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI — Reprint permission granted with full attribution.

We Never Have Time for Strategic Planning!

Tuesday, May 18th, 2010
Strategic Planning Expert Robert Bradford

Strategic Planning Expert Robert Bradford

By Robert W. Bradford, President/CEO

I’ve heard this comment from people who are very successful.  People who are running companies that – for the moment – are doing quite well.  And yet, this comment puzzles me, mightily.  It puzzles me because strategic planning is about doing the right thing in the right place at the right time.  What could be more important than that?

When someone says they don’t have time for strategic planning, they don’t really mean they don’t have time.  Everyone has the same 24 hours in a day, 7 days a week.  Some do strategic planning, while others spend their time on other activities.  What “I don’t have time for strategic planning” really means is “I haven’t made strategic planning a PRIORITY”.  This scares me some times – when I hear it from people running larger companies – and it saddens me at other times, when I think about what any company can become with better strategic planning.

In the course of my work, I’ve encountered lots of people who run great companies.  Lots of them wanted to work with me on strategy development – and I have heard the excuse “I don’t have time for strategic planning” from many of them.  Sadly, some of them really needed it, and went out of business a few years later, after “not having time” for strategy.  Some of them I have ended up working with and they have unanimously said “We wish we had found time for this years ago!”   There is no question that companies that do strategic planning well end up much farther down the path to success faster than those who try to just “muddle through”.

The truth is, developing a strategic plan often creates the feeling you have MORE time, not less.  This is because good strategic planning helps the whole team focus on the things that will truly drive your company forward, instead of tugging your organization in six different directions.  Also, a good strategic plan will help you find activities that you are spending time and money on right now that aren’t moving you forward – so you can stop doing things that are just a waste of time and money.  If you are familiar with Simplified Strategic Planning, you also know that the best process also pays very close attention to strategic issues that you do or do not have time for – and helps you to assure that highest priority is given to the issues most critical to your success.

So, what kind of company is yours?  Do you have time to assure you are doing the right thing in the right place at the right time?  Do you have time to build a dependable framework for growth and viability for your company?  Or are you waiting until you feel you have “enough time” to do it?  Take it from someone who has seen this come up a hundred times – there is no “right” time to do strategic planning.  Don’t make the mistake of waiting for the right time only to find your best opportunities have passed you by.  Schedule your next strategic planning meeting now!

Robert Bradford is President/CEO of the Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc.  He can be reached at rbradford@cssp.com.

Three Keys to Recovery Success:Re-focus Your Efforts to Outperform Your Competition

Friday, April 23rd, 2010

By Denise Harrison, Vice President

Strategic Planning Expert

Strategic Planning Expert

Recently I was talking to a company president – he was frustrated that a large project was off track.  What happened?  Well, during the recession, his team bid on a significant contract for a large company; the contract included requirements that were a stretch for his company.  Traditionally the team focused on small to mid-sized businesses, but during the recession they decided to bid on this contract in order to bring in additional revenue.  The result?  Resources were being pulled off other projects to meet these requirements, and unfortunately the large customer was not happy because the project was not progressing smoothly.  Even worse, the smaller traditional customers were unhappy because resources normally available to them were working on the large project.  Has the recession caused your company to take on business that is pulling you away from profitable business? 

Re-focus Your Efforts 

Yes, during a recession it is easy to look at any business as good business.  But often companies take on business that does not leverage their competencies and/or causes it to misallocate resources. This new business may cause resources to be spread too thinly, working on projects that may bring in revenue, but are not profitable, or, more critically, divert resources from core, profitable customers.  In order to emerge from the recession in a strong position, it is important that you take the following three steps: 

1.      Re-assess what your company does well: “Know thyself”

a.       Understand where your competencies are:  what are those skills, processes and knowledge that are most valuable to your customers?

b.      Know what your company does do well, and what it does not do well, so you will concentrate on serving the customers who value what you do not only during the recession, but for the long term.

2.      Identify market segments or customer groups that you currently serve – and focus on the ones who value what you do well: “Cherish thy core”

a.       Do these segments/customers select your company because they value the things that you are good at doing? These are the customers that will be profitable.

b.      Or are there some segments/customers that simply came to you during the recession when you were trying to get business – any business to shore up the top-line. Re-focus on the profitable segments.

3.      Once you have identified the segments that value your competencies then look within the segment and identify who the winning customers will be during this recovery: “Know thy customers”

a.       Customers who were doing well before the recession may not be the same ones who are doing well after the recession. 

           i.      Some customers within these segments are not positioned to grow during the recovery.  Many         have taken cuts that will not allow them to take advantage of the recovery. Others are still hurting financially.

           ii.      Industries may have changed and requirements for gaining market share may have altered – different companies make take the lead.  Look at how the landscape in the financial industry has changed – some market participants are gone – others merged with more successful companies. Identify who the winners will be during this recovery. 

Often recessions cause you to de-focus your efforts.  As you develop your strategy for the recovery make sure your team re-focuses its efforts so that it is concentrating on leveraging the competencies that you have and that your customers value.   These will be the segments and customers that will allow your company to grow profitably during this recovery. This renewed focus will allow your team to outperform your less disciplined competitors who are still chasing business, as if all business is good business.

Denise Harrison is Vice President of the Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc.  She can be reached at harrison@cssp.com

Time to Start Planning for Growth – Step One: Analysis

Wednesday, April 21st, 2010

By M. Dana Baldwin, Senior Consultant

Strategic Planning Expert
Strategic Planning Expert

As we get further into 2010, the time has come to start planning for the uptick in the economy.  No, it likely will not be a “V” shaped recovery.  And, if the government and the Federal Reserve get it wrong, we could have a “W” shaped double dip rather than a recovery.  But, sooner or later, the economy will recover, and you would do well to plan for it and to be ready when the indicators turn positive essentially across the board.  

So, what is involved in this planning for the recovery?  To be ready, there are a number of areas you should check out and be ready for.  First: will your customers after the recovery begins be the same customers you were selling before and during the recession?  Have you serviced them well enough that they will continue to want to do business with you?  Do you have the relationships deeply enough established that you will continue to enjoy their business in the future? 

Second: What will you be selling in the future, as compared with what you sold prior to the slowdown, and with what you actually were selling during the slow period we are just beginning to emerge from now? 

Third: What do you want to sell going forward?  Are there any lessons you have learned about your business, your products and services, that can translate forward into more business, more profits and better products and services for your customers, present and future?  What did you do well for your customers during the slowdown, and what did you learn about yourself, your products and services, and your customers that will make your future better and more profitable? 

Fourth: Why were you able to sustain your business during the recession?  What was it that your customers valued that kept your business viable?  What did you stop doing during the recession that impacted your bottom line, either positively or negatively?  What did you learn from the changes you made in order to get through the tough times?  How can these lessons be applied toward ensuring success as business improves? 

We have posed a lot of questions above, and getting the answers will involve considerable effort and introspection.  The challenges of the future must be analyzed objectively and systematically in order to learn from the events so we may prosper as the economic activity improves.  At the same time, we must be objective about making changes to support increased activities, so we do not lag behind the curve and miss opportunities, and so we don’t leap too far, burdening our companies with increased costs and commitments. 

This is where a formal, well-structured, objective strategic planning process comes into play.  In order to be properly prepared, with milestones for making changes, and contingency plans for various scenarios, a thorough planning process is key to steering toward success.  Without an objective analysis of the past, along with a realistic set of goals, objectives and strategies to follow for the future, you may not be able to take advantage of the opportunities which will come along as the economic atmosphere improves.  Planning is essential for success, and this planning should likely start soon so you are prepared when the tide changes.

M. Dana Baldwin is a Senior Consultant with Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc. and can be reached at baldwin@cssp.com.

© Copyright 2010 by Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI — Reprint permission granted with full attribution. 

Why Your Strategy Needs To Change

Tuesday, April 6th, 2010

By Robert W. Bradford, President/CEO

Strategic Planning Expert Robert Bradford
Strategic Planning Expert Robert Bradford

Every once in a while, I run across a company that is doing just fine, and has been pretty successful for a long time.

These companies scare me.  Nothing creates failure like success, and the temptation to rest on one’s laurels has heralded doom for many a fine organization.

These days, people at least accept the idea that old strategies don’t always work.  In the 1990’s, this was attributed to the “new economy”.  In 2009, it was attributed to the bad economy.  The reality is that old strategies almost always stop working, eventually.

There are three key reasons why your currently successful strategy is likely to break in the future:

1.  Technology

2.  Imitation

3.  Replacement

The first is a pretty obvious reason, if your strategy is built around technology.  Even if it isn’t, technology can do an end run around your product or service – just ask all the struggling tax service firms that are trying to replace low-end work lost to simple computer programs.  Even more insidious are technologies that suck the life out of your customers’ markets – it’s possible you won’t see those coming until it’s too late.

The second threat, imitation is a serious problem if your strategy becomes too successful.  Not surprisingly, competitors can sometimes see when your approach is akin to a license to print money, and you can bet they will want in on that action.  This doesn’t mean they will succeed – witness the ridiculous failure of most U.S. airlines who attempted to emulate Southwest Airlines in the 1990’s.  But even a failed attempt to imitate you will suck profits out of your market, and it will spoil your customers into thinking there will always be bargains waiting for them.  In the worst cases, everyone does get the basic idea behind your strategy, and the thing that originally set you apart becomes commoditized, which can be a nearly permanent problem.

The third threat, replacement, is sometimes – but not always – the result of technology, so it has a special status.  Anything that customers might use to replace the value you offer – not just your product – can cause a replacement problem for your strategy.  For example, hugely discounted airfares in the 80’s and 90’s replaced a main driver for need in the passenger rail and bus industries (price).

In each of these situations, playing the game as if it has not already changed can be a recipe for disaster.  Homing in on the issue – technology, competitors, or replacements – can give you the edge you need to keep going, but sometimes a complete re-thinking of your strategy is in order.

There is no question that this re-thinking can create a stressful time for an organization.  Not only that, but the re-thinking is not guaranteed to lead you to a suitable new strategy without some trial and error.  This is one reason why most of the really successful companies we have helped through this transition started while things were still going well.  Trial and error is much more affordable if your company isn’t on the ropes.  Even if you are on the ropes, a well-directed re-thinking of your strategy is likely to get you back on a positive track, so don’t delay the hard work that this calls for when you see the warning signs.

Robert Bradford is President/CEO of the Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc.  He can be reached at rbradford@cssp.com.

Here We Go Again – The End of Strategic Planning is Forecast – Again

Tuesday, March 16th, 2010

By M. Dana Baldwin, Senior Consultant

Strategic Planning Expert
Strategic Planning Expert

In a recent issue of The Wall Street Journal, an article forecasts the end of Strategic Planning – again.  In the article, the efficacy of strategic planning is questioned in some depth.  Instead of utilizing strategic planning properly, the article suggests that flexibility and responsiveness will be enhanced by reacting to the market place because of the fast moving nature of today’s market place. 

In reality, if a company follows the Simplified Strategic Planning process that we have espoused for nearly 30 years, the company actually enhances the flexibility and responsiveness that the article implies can only be achieved with these “new” processes. 

Let’s examine the elements of strategic planning to be sure we fully understand the implications of the process.  First: In order to start effectively, a company must know where it currently is positioned in the market place.  We will examine our markets – customers and products/services they buy.  We will analyze our competition to see where they are strong and where they are weak.  We will look at the technologies involved in making or providing our products and services, those involved in the internal processes within our company, like IT, and where applicable, the technologies utilized in our actual products or services themselves.  We will look into our suppliers, both people and materials or services which we buy.  We will analyze the effects of the parts of the economy which affect our business and we will determine what role regulations, both governmental and industry-approved, play in our business.  All of this is done looking at today’s situation and at the recent history of the company in order to have a good understanding of where we are starting our planning from. 

We will look inside the company to be sure we have strong financial reporting systems and processes, and we will seek to track the metrics of our performance.  The goal of this tracking of metrics is to help us determine trends in the areas of finance, customers, internal measures, and innovation and learning.  We will also look at our strengths and weaknesses to learn what we should emphasize and what we should avoid or change.  Finally, we will determine our Strategic Competency – our sustainable competitive advantage — to verify what we must do to build our business (rework) most effectively.  Having done all this, we will understand where we stand in our markets relative to what customers want and need, and relative to our competition.  We will understand how we compete and the basis for that competitive advantage we will seek to exploit. 

Only after establishing where we are and our strengths, can we begin to develop strategies to effectively compete.  By skipping this first part of a good strategic planning process, a company could well miss what the true basis for competing effectively is – for that particular company – and could misconstrue what strategies will be effective in the markets they are competing in.  Without going through the basics, which really do not take all that much time, considering the good that can arise from doing them, the choices the company may make could lead them astray, and could make them less competitive or, even worse, headed in the wrong direction.  There is no substitute for pursuing an effective strategic planning process which will lead to good strategies for penetrating and exploiting the market places in which you are competing.  The process does not have to be lengthy, it can be done quickly enough to be responsive to the changes that are happening in our rapidly evolving markets, and once done, can be revised very quickly should the need arise.

M. Dana Baldwin is a Senior Consultant with Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc. and can be reached at baldwin@cssp.com.

© Copyright 2010 by Center for Simplified Strategic Planning, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI — Reprint permission granted with full attribution.